
%0 Journal Article
%A Mann, Henry 
%A Proctor, Vernon W. 
%A Taylor, Alberto S. 
%T Towards a Biogeography of North American Charophytes
%J Australian Journal of Botany
%D 1999/07/02
%V 47
%N 3
%P 445-458
%K 
%R https://doi.org/10.1071/BT97087
%U https://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/BT97087 
%X The great bulk of the world&#8217;s charophyte literature of the past 100 years or more suffers from several major limitations. Much is entirely descriptive with but few attempts to ascribe any functionality to the features under consideration, or how they adapt such species to their respective ecological niches. Charophyte distributions have been attributed almost entirely to physical parameters with virtually no consideration given to the role of aquatic herbivores or other biotic environmental factors. Furthermore, most workers have focused on relatively restricted areas with little or no reference to others either near or far removed. That there is much to be gained from a wider focus (both spatially and conceptually) that incorporates greater conjecture as well as enhanced collaboration is here suggested. How are the charophyte floras of one region similar to, or different from, those of another, and, of particular significance, &#8216;Why?&#8217; The authors, being North American, focus on that continent but with the firm conviction that most generalities applicable there hold equally true for other landmasses, and have done so for the previous 10, if not 100, million years. This account focuses first, if somewhat superficially, on 14 widely distinct North American charophyte communities (plus South American Lake Titicaca) and then in greater detail on four of those. Among other issues considered are how species richness relates to latitude; why some geographical entities support more charophyte species than do others; the extent to which charophyte floras reflect the availability of different habitats; the contributions of herbivory to the preceding; the stability of the North American charophyte flora; the ecological considerations most often reflected by charophyte zonation and how&#8211;or to what extent&#8211;range extensions reflect niche preferences or requirements. While the authors well appreciate just how minimal their efforts may appear a century hence, at least they hope to have placed on the table some considerations with which colleagues from other landmasses may agree, disagree or suggest modifications. 
